3 ms·

This is such a weird framing. The person (a pedestrian) died because a car driven by a human hit them. There was also a human-driven police car that was also bl

This is such a weird framing. The person (a pedestrian) died because a car driven by a human hit them. There was also a human-driven police car that was also blocking the ambulance. I don't think the Cruise made this situation better, but it was a human-driven car that caused the death. And as far as I could find, Cruise has never hit a human.

falcolas 3y ago
If you shoot a gun out your window and kill someone who jumped off the building, you are still on the hook for manslaughter. That is to say, Cruise is still on the hook, even if they didn’t hit the pedestrian in the first place.
- halfcat 3y ago
  What if a brand new, human-driven taxi breaks down, blocking the ambulance? Is the taxi company on the hook?
  - tremon 3y ago
    Did the Cruise robotaxi have a mechanical malfunction? If not, can you try harder to come up with a more relevant whataboutism?
    - halfcat 3y ago
      No. Because it’s irrelevant how relevant it is. That’s the entire point. It could be a stalled car, or a fallen tree. People get overly concerned with blame attribution, and future prevention, when there is often no fault to begin with. It’s akin to starting a witch hunt after the bad harvest.
      - statop 3y ago
        This comment is very selfawarewolves. I agree, people in this thread are overly concerned with blame attribution, but maybe it's not the group you think. SFFD is highlighting to people who live/work/visit SF that so called "AV" taxis are getting in their way. That they were able to move another vehicle to get the ambulance on its way is immaterial. They are saying that in a different set of circumstances where they can't, this car blocks the ambulance. That's the problem, that's the fault. Your comment sounds like throwing a ladder on the freeway, but you vigilantes better not stop traffic to clear it, no one has hit it. Yet.
spondylosaurus 3y ago
Nah, the reason someone needed an ambulance is totally immaterial here. A person had life-threatening injuries, and Cruise prevented that person from receiving critical treatment. Counterfactually, that person would most likely be alive if the Cruise taxi hadn't been on the street that day.
- gkoberger 3y ago
  What makes you believe this? According to the videos, there were multiple ambulances on the scene and the injured person was on their way to the hospital within 90 seconds. It’s very likely both are true: Cruise made things more difficult, but didn’t cause enough of an issue to materially change the outcome. Source: https://sfstandard.com/2023/09/01/person-dies-cruise-robotaxi-blocks-san-francisco-ambulance/ https://sfstandard.com/2023/09/01/person-dies-cruise-robotax...
  - jinkiesScoob 3y ago
    Unbelieveable that you buy that. If Cruise wants to clear this up they can post the video. I'm gonna believe the first responders here who do this for a living over a corporate PR mouthpiece. That journalist could have signed a non disparagement contract to see the video or just been paid off. Cruise has the video, there is no body. Post it. Anything else is bullshit.
- dehrmann 3y ago
  > Counterfactually, that person would most likely be alive if the Cruise taxi hadn't been on the street that day. That's a big statement. It sounds like it delayed the ambulance up to 90 seconds. 90 seconds can make a difference, but the patient died "later," and from pretty severe injuries.

falcolas 3y ago

If you shoot a gun out your window and kill someone who jumped off the building, you are still on the hook for manslaughter. That is to say, Cruise is still on the hook, even if they didn’t hit the pedestrian in the first place.

halfcat 3y ago
What if a brand new, human-driven taxi breaks down, blocking the ambulance? Is the taxi company on the hook?
- tremon 3y ago
  Did the Cruise robotaxi have a mechanical malfunction? If not, can you try harder to come up with a more relevant whataboutism?
  - halfcat 3y ago
    No. Because it’s irrelevant how relevant it is. That’s the entire point. It could be a stalled car, or a fallen tree. People get overly concerned with blame attribution, and future prevention, when there is often no fault to begin with. It’s akin to starting a witch hunt after the bad harvest.
    - statop 3y ago
      This comment is very selfawarewolves. I agree, people in this thread are overly concerned with blame attribution, but maybe it's not the group you think. SFFD is highlighting to people who live/work/visit SF that so called "AV" taxis are getting in their way. That they were able to move another vehicle to get the ambulance on its way is immaterial. They are saying that in a different set of circumstances where they can't, this car blocks the ambulance. That's the problem, that's the fault. Your comment sounds like throwing a ladder on the freeway, but you vigilantes better not stop traffic to clear it, no one has hit it. Yet.

spondylosaurus 3y ago

Nah, the reason someone needed an ambulance is totally immaterial here. A person had life-threatening injuries, and Cruise prevented that person from receiving critical treatment. Counterfactually, that person would most likely be alive if the Cruise taxi hadn't been on the street that day.

gkoberger 3y ago
What makes you believe this? According to the videos, there were multiple ambulances on the scene and the injured person was on their way to the hospital within 90 seconds. It’s very likely both are true: Cruise made things more difficult, but didn’t cause enough of an issue to materially change the outcome. Source: https://sfstandard.com/2023/09/01/person-dies-cruise-robotaxi-blocks-san-francisco-ambulance/ https://sfstandard.com/2023/09/01/person-dies-cruise-robotax...
- jinkiesScoob 3y ago
  Unbelieveable that you buy that. If Cruise wants to clear this up they can post the video. I'm gonna believe the first responders here who do this for a living over a corporate PR mouthpiece. That journalist could have signed a non disparagement contract to see the video or just been paid off. Cruise has the video, there is no body. Post it. Anything else is bullshit.
dehrmann 3y ago
> Counterfactually, that person would most likely be alive if the Cruise taxi hadn't been on the street that day. That's a big statement. It sounds like it delayed the ambulance up to 90 seconds. 90 seconds can make a difference, but the patient died "later," and from pretty severe injuries.